🚀 go-pugleaf

Olin K. McDaniel wrote:
> 
> On 14 Apr 1997 20:27:50 GMT, "Greg Cisko"
> <gci...@nOsPaMconcentric.net> wrote:
> 
> >
> >Olin K. McDaniel <omcd...@flosc.net> wrote in article
> ><33524ed...@news.gabn.net>...
> >
> >> I found out shortly after Win 95 came out, it was the most corrupting
> >> thing to my DOS installation, so I reformatted and created two
> >
> >If you install Win95 into C:\Windows where you had an old version
> >of windows, then yes it does overwrite DOS & Win3.x. Just install
> >into C:\Win95 instead and you will have OLD-DOS available from
> >the F8 option on bootup.
> >
> >> completely independent and fully isolated operating systems.  That way
> >> I can keep all my DOS programs in a pure DOS environment, DOS 6.22,
> >> and any programs that need to run under Win95 are installed and run in
> >> that environment.  It works fine for me.
> >
> >The DOS version of Win95 is just fine for games. There really is no
> >need for DOS6.22 if you have Win95. You do not run DOS games
> >in a DOS window. In some cases (like back to baghdad) you can
> >though. Rob Kim posted a great idea some time ago. Just make
> >a Win95 shortcut to COMMAND.COM. Then go to the section
> >where you specify the individual CONFIG.SYS & AUTOEXEC.BAT
> >and load your CDrom, mouse and soundcard stuff in those
> >sections. You can also make a shortcut for each DOS game with
> >these startup files specified. Each time you run the game the computer
> >re-boots & runs everything needed for the game. This is the things
> >that you would normaly put in your DOS config.sys & autoexec.
> >When you are done you re-boot back to Win95. Simple with
> >some practice.
> >
> >As for DirectX 3 messing up DOS games... No way. Anyone
> >who thinks otherwise does not understand what is going on
> >with DOS/Win95. Period. Sorry to be blunt but that is how it
> >is.
> >
> 
> Greg,
> 
> You are absolutely correct,  I really don't know what all is going on
> with Win95 - neither in its native form nor it its so called DOS, but
> the full truth is - I don't feel I really want to know!!!!
> 
> I've been perfectly comfortable with DOS, having learned it in all its
> twists and turns, plus all the add ins that were available over the
> past 12 - 15 years.  I will continue to run programs that were/or will
> be written for DOS under that OS.  As I acquire new programs that
> demand Win95, I'll accept their requirements for their OS and use
> Win95 for them.
> 
> To do all the headstands etc. that you and others keep saying is so
> simple to do, and relearn another OS is not a viable alternative for
> me.  It's that simple.  I like to use what I feel comfortable with,
> and don't intend to knuckle under to a tidal wave of pressure.  It
> appears there are plenty of others of us, call us stubborn, hard
> headed, or even worse - we yield with great resistance.  Fighting all
> the way.  No offense meant, but I don't have to buy a new car every
> year nor a new computer every 6 months, nor a new OS when the old one
> does all I can possibly want.
> 
> Guess the flames begin!  <vbg>
> 
> Olin
> 
> -
REFORMAT AGAIN and just put on windows 95!!!
DirectX3 Rules dos sux!!!! There should only be 95 games!!
Hang on but Dos games run faster...But doesn't direct supposed do make
it faster o well just buy a faster computer!!!yeah right!!
Use OS/2 Warp....No that sux to it all sux!!!!!
-- 
	------Smmeeeeeeggggggg heeeeaaaaaadddddd-------
'It will be happened; it shall be going to be happening; it will be was
an 
event that could will have been taken place in the future.'   =8-)=